Why are you even here?
"Universities should be a place of open discussion!" Yeah and they shouldn’t be a place where people can just go to espouse stupid dipshittery that for some reason we’re still debating as though it’s valid.
We shouldn’t teach creationism in science class, we shouldn’t claim that the pyramids were built by aliens, and we shouldn’t doubt the existence of rape culture.
"I just think both sides should be represented” is pretty much always code for “I know I can’t easily silence this progressive hippie bullshit but at least I can try to sow my hateful anti-scientific agenda wherever possible because every vulnerable child I can twist to my ends is a victory”
Alright motherfuckers, i’m gonna have a good ol’ sit down and have a discussion with you guys about the human mind and this little problem we’re having called
We live in a flawed society. This society tells us that whatever is going on in our head is okay and that it’s our job to decide for ourselves what the truths of our small universe are. To some, it’s a truth of their universe that lady gaga’s music is total shit and needs to be taken off the air this instant. To some, it’s a truth of their universe that denim jackets with denim jeans is the best look ever and should have thrived well beyond their respective fashion periods. To some people, and these people are right btw, it’s a truth that Disney has lost their ability to do everything except make very very pretty two hour visual experiences.
To each and every one of these people, these opinions are the undeniable, infallible, irrefutable, and immortal truths of the world in which they live. These truths put a filter over the world as it is and makes the reality around them easier to understand. These opinions help us mold the environment around us into something we ourselves find more palatable.
So what do we do when someone else’s truth is different then our own?
We fuckin’ argue that shit. That’s what we do. We fuckin’ talk about it and when neither person is willing to relinquish their truth, we go home and badmouth the opposition like the god damn children we are.
So how do we make our world more peaceful? Conquest is one option. Conquest is where we choose to spread our own truths as far as our tongue can reach and hope others spread it in turn, thus bringing people from every far reach of our universe together under the same truth. Consolidation is another, where both parties realize that they share so many smaller truths and they learn to take bits from the other until they have a new, more beautiful idea for their truth. And last but not least, we have Concession, where we buckle under the others wims and let our universe take one for the team in the name of retaining a status quo, or some other semblance of normality.
Now what does this mean in the name of these big, debatable topics like Evolution, Global Warming and Rape Culture?
As you can see, we’ve already spoken about how internalized our truths are. How deeply ingrained into our entire perception of the world and how stubborn we are as people to change them. But there’s hope. With enough rationalization, with enough persuasion and enough “logic”, anything can be made to sound like a better truth. But what happens when a creationist converts an evolutionist, only to have another evolutionist come and convert them back? With the world in constant flux and both messages being spread like the viruses they are, it’s easy to understand how many people end up being “On The Fence” or disillusioned with the topic entirely.
Which is where the large debates come in. When you have two major figures, people recognize and are passionate about, coming head to head, people will listen. People will watch. People WILL pay attention. When events like Bill Nye Vs That Other Guy take place, people who are on the fence or aren’t entirely cemented onto their platform will have ample opportunity to watch the two sides play out. When two sides speak at the same time, flaws in the argument are noticed. When two people take turns discussing the pros AND cons of their argument. It’s not just sugar and spice when it comes to a debate. When one on one, a global warming media jockey and tote and spew a hundred thousand numbers from the top of their head and talk about the polar bears and the rising tides that have recently exiled an entire population from their island stomping ground. One on one, the global cooling fox news reporter can joke about how much snow fell in Georgia and mock the media jocky for falling for the next big “the world is flat” scheme. It’s only when the two of them come together to discuss their points publicly can the media jock stomp his scientific foot up the fox news reps proverbial ass for the world to see.
THAT is why we need to have debates.
THAT is why we need to have open discussion.
So that the dumb shits who have internalized the universal truths of “FEMALE PRIVILEGE” and “ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE” can have a thorough and meticulously groomed public stomping for the world to see, react to and internalize.
Now it’s true you will always have your diehards, and it’s true that you will always have that cancer on the world spreading its message below the surface…
But it’s only through public works that the truths of smaller universes can one day run true with the truths of the much bigger reality.
Truths are nothing but opinions backed with facts.
And facts are only facts if we believe them.